Skip to main content

About your Search

20121201
20121231
STATION
MSNBC 4
MSNBCW 4
WBAL (NBC) 2
WRC (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 19
Search Results 0 to 18 of about 19 (some duplicates have been removed)
, especially justice roberts court is wary of roe v. wade and will not throw out arrangements in 30 or 40 states and will resolve the case. only section 3 is as issue. i believe the court does not want to be overturning arrangements throughout the country on something to delicate. they've learned a lesson that that's not the right role. >> that's talk about that. people are making the comparison to 1973, roe v. wade. 37 states, by law or in their constitutions now ban same-sex marriage but they're legal in nine states as well as the nation's capital, washington, d.c. a new poll, 40% say they approve same-sex marriage. 30% support legal unions, 24% say same-sex couples should not be allowed to enter in any union. president obama has come out in favor of same-sex marriage though he wants to leave it to the state issue. some people as bill suggested are comparing this to the 70s when opinion was evolving on abortion. the states seemed to work it out and the court came down with a big ruling and 40 years later we're having a holy war on the issue. how do you see the court reacting? do you see
much for joining us inside "the war room." tim dickinson of "rolling stone" magazine. roe v. wade is the law of the land. americans overwhelmingly support a woman's right to choose. michigan handed president obama a 9-point victory five weeks ago so when i see a legislative body sneakily passing anti-choice members in the proverbial dead of night the phrase subverting the will of the people seems mild. my thoughts on that right after the break. ♪ ♪ destined to take them over. the uconnect command center with sirius xm satellite radio in the new 2013 ram 1500. engineered to move heaven and earth. guts. glory. ram. >> jennifer: back in march of 1984 the owner of the baltimore colts moved baltimore's beloved football team to indianapolis. he said he wouldn't do it but in the middle of the night 12 mayflower moving trucks were hired to tear out the region's heart and soul under cover of darkness. it was incredibly unpopular extremely underhanded. and it devastated the people. it even brought baltimore's mayor to tears.
of the same-sex marriage issue, and that could result in what would eventually be the roe v. wade of gay rights. >> we are back on a big story that will become an even bigger story when we move forward, and that's the question of marriage equality for gays and lesbians in the country. speaker gingrich, you oppose same-sex marriage. do you think the tide is turning? we know it's turning in terms of public opinion. what does it mean they are taking this on? >> the justices looked at the question, if you're an american citizen and you are legally married in iowa, what happens if you visit another state and you end up in the hospital? do you have any visitation rights? once this has begun to move, it is going -- it is so complicated that i think the court felt almost compelled as a national institution to look at it. >> and i think, lawrence, as i have talked to lawyers about this, what people need to understand is that there is the question of your ability to have benefits. this is not whether the defense of marriage act is completely thrown out. that is that question. and then prop 8 in ca
by next summer that is groundbreaking for gay marriage rights as roe v. wade was for abortion in the 1970s, potentially at least after they agreed hear arguments on the defense of marriage act and proposition 8. justice correspondent pete williams joins me. pete, the fact that they took both of these cases, what is the significance from your analysis? >> well, it's the prop 8 case, andrea, that could be the biggy. it could be very narrow. the doma case has a very straight forward question. is it constitutional for a federal law to say that the government will not recognize marriages even when they're legal in the states, so that if married couples get married in the nine states where it's now legal, the federal government doesn't recognize those marriages. there's a question about whether that's unconstitutional discrimination, but if the supreme court does strike down doma, it doesn't say anything about whether the states must permit same-sex marriage, it only says if they do, the federal government must recognize them. so it's the proposition 8 case from california that potentially raise
Search Results 0 to 18 of about 19 (some duplicates have been removed)